[symbol]porneia[/symbol] does not mean “fornication.” It’s derived from a word for cultic prostitutes, [symbol]pornh[/symbol] (porne) which itself is derived from the verb [symbol]pernhmi[/symbol] (pernemi) “to sell.” A porne was one who was “for sale” and it was orginally a specific reference to Canaanite Temple prostitutes. Porneia referred to having sex with those prostitutes which was considered a form of idolotry (in fact, *porneia * can also be translated simply as “idolotry”).
Although porneia acquired some other meanings, including the practice of incest and adultery, it principally referred to the practice of sexual idolotry and to specifically ritual sexual practices of “idolotorous” cults. “Fornication” is a completely bogus translation.
(As for the translations, while I certainly appreciate them and am reading the debate on them, I’m completely unqualified to participate other than by asking questions. If I don’t respond to a particular person’s translation, that’s why–I definitely appreciate your offering them!)
I interpreted “sex outside of marriage” as meaning sex between unmarried people, That would obviously be a morally neutral act in itself. I didn’t read the question as referring to adultery but I’ve already said that sex which involves a betrayal of trust (i.e. “cheating”) is unethical.
Whoa, did this thread go in a direction I didn’t expect.
Firstly, by ‘outside marriage’ I don’t think they mean ‘involving someone in a marriage’. Violating the legal and/or religious monogamy contract one entered into is hardly good under any morality. Let’s stick to simple unmarried sex.
Unmarried sex is a freedom. Indulging in such a freedom is no more “immoral” than driving, playing sports or drinking alcohol, all of which have negative consequences.
Would those who Agree with #56 accept that it is a strongly authoritarian position? To suggest that state/church sanctioned sex is the only moral sex sounds, to this European, like something from past centuries, let alone decades.
:smack: Thank you, Captain Obvious! (And this time I really mean it–sometimes it takes someone pointing out the obvious before I notice it). In such a case, there’s nothing wrong with our swingin’ singles checking out the babes: since a swingin’ single can’t commit adultery, they’re not committing it in their hearts.
Yes, Diogenes, it does, and you are absolutely wrong. You are confusing its pre-classical and post-classical usages. This straightjackets the language to conform with your personal ideology.
First, the derivation of porne from pernemi is probabilistic at best. We believe that most prostitutes were purchased slaves, hence pernemi makes sense. It is nowhere attested in any written source.
Second, even by the time of early Greek lyric poetry, porne was used free from its supposedly ritual context to mean, more generally, whore. See for yourself in Archilochus 142 and Archilochus 527.
Porneia is a much later word, and is not attested classically. The attestation for “prostitution” is found in Hippocrates. In the Septuagint in is used to translate zanah, or to commit fornication.
A healthy sex life can exist out of a serious, long-term relationship. And a happy sex life is necesary and even vital for a happy marriage. Not to mention it’s all the baggage attached to sex that hurts, not sex itself.
I’m sorry but you’re wrong. There is nothing “probalistic” about the fact that porne is derived from pernemi. Any Greek Lexicon will tell you this. And we are not talking about what a “whore” meant to Greeks but what it mean to Jews. Porne is the Septuagint word for Temple prostitutes.
Sexual slavery was not forbidden to Jews, by the way. What do you think Solomon’s concubines were?
In any case, the word is definitely associated with prostitution, not just any old swinging and “fornication” is absolutely not an accurate translation.
No, I haven’t read Rouselle. I googled his name but all the hits were in French.
I think that as part of our evolving the ability to enjoy sex, we rose above being bound by sexual instinct and can make decisions on how/if we enjoy sex. I chose to follow a morality that holds that sex must be confined to committed, monogamous relationships. However, my choice should not be forced onto anyone else.
Except, of course, the most widely used and well respected lexicon of them all, Liddell & Scott. Unsurprisingly, there are no attestations for this etymology, only guesses.
Thoroughly Hellenized Jews who, by the time of the Gospels, had been living in a Greek-dominated world for three hundred years.
Shouting it over and over from the rooftops does not make your claim true, Diogenes. I have offered cites, attestations, and the word of, well, the best lexicon in the business. You have offered your opintion.
[/quote]
No, I haven’t read Rouselle. I googled his name but all the hits were in French.
[/QUOTE]
Rousselle is a she. There is an English translation of her book, Porneia: On Desire and the Body in Antiquity. I think it is by a guy named Pheasant.
For further reading, by the way, you can watch some folks over on b-greek dissect porneia here. Apparently this was a hotly discussed topic, so there will be many more searchable discussions out there.
I don’t know that I’d agree with that (although I’m sure that’s how it’s coded on the test). Saying, “Having sex outside of marriage should be illegal” would be a strongly authoritarian position. But it’s possible to think that something is immoral without wanting it to be illegal. That’s one of the hallmarks of libertarian thought, and how it differs from authoritarian thought…The libertarian tolerates actions he considers immoral, while the authoritarian would forbid them.
Which does not alter the fact that porne is the word they used for Temple Prostitute.
You haven’t offered any cites that porneia means “fornication,” you’ve only disputed the etymology and argued about whether a porne is a cultic prostitute or just a whore. Even if we accept the “just a whore” definition, we still don’t have an argument for porneia as “fornication” but for 'whoring." You haven’t shown that it referred to any and all non-marital sex.
Thank you, I will read the b-greek discussion and try to discover more about Rousselle.
I showed that Jerome himself translates porneia as fornicationes. If the translator of the Vulgate isn’t a strong enough attestation for you, then I am not sure what is. There is scholarly consensus that Jerome knew Greek and Hebrew rather well.
There is certainly dispute over how much modern cultural baggage attached to the term “fornication” actually should be conveyed by porneia. This is certainly an interesting discussion. Arguments that porneia is just a certain kind of prostitution and is not a more general condemnation of sexual immorality are highly tendentious and frequently rest on uncertain etymology.
For the record, I heartily endorse and healthily practice fornication as frequently as possible. My argument is purely linguistic and not at all moral.
As I said, this is one of the questions that keeps me merely in the -6 region of the authoritarian/libertarian position, rather than all the way at the extreme.
However, where I think the question fails is in how my view should apply to other people, governments, rules, or laws. It is quite possible for a person to have highly authoritarian standards for their own conduct and behavior in a certain area, while not giving a rat’s ass about their neighbor’s activities in the same area, and wanting to the state to stay the hell away from that area altogether.
No, here as with Maeglin, you are simply wrong. The most common usage of the term in the New Testament is not specific to any marital status, but means simply “woman”.
The term is used as “bride” or “wife” (in the NAS) 84 times; as simply “women” 130 times. Cite.
You are projecting (I suspect) your own notions onto the text.
You seem to be arguing that Jesus thought that anything that didn’t hurt another person was fine. BMalion has already cited verses which contradict this - Jesus taught very specifically that wishful thinking about adultery was sinful, even if the act was never carried out.
You have it backwards. There is no reason to believe that Jesus limits His definition of sexual sin only to acts which hurt someone else - just the opposite is true, as BMalion’s cite shows.
With all due respect, Jerome was not an expert on 2nd Temple Jewish sexual morality and was probably unaware of what prostitution meant in cultic terms.
And translating porneia as “sexual immorality” is just begging the question since we haven’t defined what constitutes sexual immorality.
